Guang
Clara
José
Julian
to be able to present and reflect on the story behind neighborhood planning, while summarizing, collecting and generating tools and strategies that can effectively help with different goals and problems, so that readers can have a clearer understanding of the present and future of neighborhood planning.
Directors: Alfredo Ramìrez Rico
TERM 2
Daniel
REFORMING: DOWNTOWN OVERVIEW
Author: Siqi JiachengSun Sun Hantang Li Yang
Seminar and Technical Staff: ShengyangKiss Huang Besems Stoppani
Eduardo
Teresa
Studio Master: Olòriz
Team 12 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 12TEAM 3
This Booklet will focus on the context of London, using “Neighborhood Planning is a Dummy” as an argument, using the overall development of neighborhood planning in England, the particularity of London, interviews and report data as evidence to analyze and discuss the deep inequities faced by neighborhood Ourplanning.goalis
Contents CHAPTER 4 - APPDENDIX NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ENCYCLOPEDIA 4.1 Roadmap for Neighborhood Planning 4.2 Preparation of Neighborhood Planning 1. A Relevant Body 2. Designation of a Neighborhood Area 3. Designation of a Neighborhood Forum 4.3 Process of Neighborhood Plan 1. Overview of Neighborhood Plan 2. Build Evidence Base 3. Publicity and Engagement 4. Preparing the Plan 5. Pre-submission Consultation 6. Submission 7. The Independent Examination 8. Referendum 9. Plan Made 4.4 Supports for Forums & Community 1. Financial Supports 2. Political & Technical Supports 3. Other Supports 4. Summary p.54 - 55 p.56 - 60 p.61 - 66 p.67 - 79 CHAPTER NEIGHBORHOOD0 PLANNING IS A DUMMY 0.0 *The Voice p.6 - 7 CHAPTER NEIGHBORHOOD1 PLANNING IN LONDON 1.1 Context 1.2 An Overview of Neighborhood Planning in the UK 1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London 1. London is Different 2. The 4 Types of Neighborhood Plan in London 3. Typical Solution of 4 Types of Demands 4. K-Means Clustering Machine Learning Analysis with different factors of London 5. Grasshopper Clustering Visualization Analysis of Neighborhood Plans 6. Correlation Matrix Analysis of Development Factors in London 7. Interview with Neighborhood Forums p.12-21p.10-11p.8-9 CHAPTER 2 LIST OF INEQUALITIES FOUND IN NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING 2.1 Dummy & Opportunity 2.2 Dynamic Model 2.3 Evidence & Discussion 1. Supports from Borough & LPA 2. Stage of Designation of Neighborhood Area 3. Stage of Designation of Neighborhood Forum 4. Stage of Evidence Review 5. The Usage of Community Infrasturcture Levy 6. Contents of Neighborhood Plans 7. Discussion p.26-37p.25p.24
CHAPTER 3 & HYPOTHSIS
CHANGE
3.1 Objectives 3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood Planning 1. Ideas for Institutional Framework 2. Ideas for Community Infrastructure Levy 3. Ideas Summary from Reports 4. Ideas for Information Guide 5. Ideas for Satire and Expose 6. Ideas for Meanwhile Use 7. Ideas for Detailed Demands 3.3 Conclusion p.39-52p.38p.53 Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 Contents 54
However, on the one hand, differences in factors such as education, income, and social background lead to community planning that is not available to all, and a large number of people at the bottom are not yet in volved, which may help exacerbate inequality. Studies have shown that the rise in homelessness in the UK after LA 2011 illustrates the disadvantage of localist
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING IS A DUMMY
DUMMYDUMMY
Therefore, we need to expose the unequal development of neighborhood planning in the context of power and resources and further exploration of neighborhood planning that can help shape a better democratic life for the future.
The central government has long hoarded and central ized power in the areas of planning and construction. Profit-oriented extractive development, in cooperation with external developers, a series of serious prob lems such as economic exploitation, racial inequality, gentrification, social cleansing and climate crisis affect people’s lives. The impact of social security cuts, hous ing market pressures and reduced local government funding has forced the state to throw more responsibil ity back to local governments, expecting people to solve problems through their own democratic cooperation and participation. Ideally, the Localism Act 2011 em powers residents to develop their communities’ future potential and meet their needs autonomously through Neighborhood Planning. On the one hand, it sets a new framework of policy restrictions for bad develop ers through the Neeighborhood Plan, and on the other hand, through the Neeighborhood Development Order, it gives the community the potential to be an internal developer and develops itself in a simpler and more efficient process.
0.0 The Voice0.0 The VoiceTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
76 - Charpter 0 - - Neighborhood Planning is A Dummy -
policymaking to marginalized groups in society. [1] On the other hand, the state has delegated “services” to municipalities and regional groups, but it is usually only a cost diversion rather than a real decentralization of power and financial autonomy, that is, responsibil ity is decentralized, not money for the performance of its duties. In the absence of sufficiently sustainable financial and technical support, existing neighborhood planning organizations have too many responsibilities while volunteering; lengthy bureaucratic interactions with local planning departments have prevented community programs from getting really effective help; even the quality of the completed Neeighborhood Plan is so far from the same that without real financial resources and official support, all the content written in the Neeighborhood Plan can only be a beautiful fantasy of the people of the region Once back to the traditional development model, external developers can still use their wealth of experience to urgently extract benefits from within the community. Especially in the context of London’s huge, complex and unfair urban develop ment, the big hands from all sides make neighborhood planning like a Dummy.
@Kaye Blegvad, Nov 2015
Central Government Planning
1.1 Context1.1 ContextTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
The Neighbourhood Planning:
The main problems:
Local Stakeholders
Overview of the act:
- Charpter 1 - - Neighborhood Planning in London -
Local people can exercise their right to participate in local development by producing their Neighbourhood Plans and Neighbourhood Development Orders.
Local Planning Authority
But even under this top-down constraint, there are still many developers who seek to circumvent them to obtain permits for short-term gain, to the detriment of local people and threatening local development.
Central Government Planning
hood devel- opment orders, community right to build, the new homes bonus and reform of the community infrastructure levy.They can increase housing supply, improve the quality of developments and better cater to local needs – those of young families starting out, for example, or older people wanting to downsize.[5]
“The New Power for the people”
Local People Local Relevant Body
The LPA is the key decision-maker in the planning sys tem. When a developer has an intention to develop, they need to submit a planning application to the LPA, and the LPA will only grant planning permission to develop ments that comply with the policies and regulations in the planning system.[2]
TOP-DOWN APPROACH
BEFORE LOCALISMTHEACT 2011
Neighbourhood Plans and Neighbourhood Development Orders like the weapons for community. Neighbourhood plan for political framework to further constrain devel opers. Neighbourhood Development Orders can elimi nate the process of development application, allowing for rapid development.
StrategicpoliciesplanLocalplan
The Act is lengthy, extending to over 240 sections, in excess of 20 Schedules and approaching 500 pages. Equally, the Act is broad in its scope. Part I introduces the ‘general power of competence’ under which local authorities are endowed with the ‘power to do anything that individuals generally may do’ provided it is not specifically prohibited.10 The essential idea is that under this novel power local authorities will be free to work with others in creative ways to reduce costs and, it is envisaged, meet local people’s needs more innova tively.
How Neighbourhood Planning can achive the community right:
On the other hand, the needs related to local housing, local economy, community facilities and infrastructure are still not being met.[3]
98
StrategicpoliciesplanLocalplan
BOTTOM-UP APPROACH
TOP-DOWN APPROACH
CommunitybourhoodNeigh-planengagementPlanningsupport
Neighbourhood planning is one of the community rights granted by the 2011 Localism Act.[4] Fundamental changes to the planning system are provided for under Part VI including the abolition of regional strategies, the introduction of neighbourhood plans and neighbour
Under the control of the planning system, the develop ment process is as follows:
DevelopmentLocal Local Planning Authority
AFTER LOCALISMTHEACT 2011
“The development process in local.”
DevelopmentLocal
• There are 22 business-led neighbourhood plans: 20 of which were Forum-led.
• 58 LPAs have no neighbourhood planning activity (no designated areas) - 18%
1.2 An Overview of Neighborhood Planning in the UKTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
- Charpter 1“England-
• 91.5% of area designations were led by Parish/ Town Councils and 8.5% were Forum-led
The vast majority are led by Parish / Town Councils[7]:
• 9 neighbourhood plans have failed examination, 6 failed referendum, 1 has been quashed in the High Court and a further 8 have formally withdrawn from the process.
As in the studies of the overall development of take-up of NPing is biased towards parished, rural areas. There is activity in all region of England, although 18% of LPAs are completely without Neighbourhood Planning activity. There are higher levels of take-up in some ar eas, notably the South East and South West, and with correspondingly weaker take-up elsewhere, particularly in the North East and London.[6]
• 94.3% of “made” Plans were led by a Parish/Town Council and 5.6% were Forum led.
& London Neighbourhood Planning Distribution”
OVERALL TAKE-UP OF NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING IN NUMBERS
• Less than 10% of designated neighbourhood areas are Forum-led (i.e. unparished and predominantly urban) and the majority of the LPAs with no NP activity are located in urban areas.
1.2 An Overview of Neighborhood Planning in the UK
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 - Neighborhood Planning in London -
The Localism Act introduced ‘a new right for commu nities to draw up a neighbourhood plan.’ This means that communities in England are not legally required to produce a plan, but it gives them the choice whether to produce one or not. Given this voluntary nature of neighbourhood planning, without resourcing to en sure that all communities have the time and means to participate and create a plan, access to this right could be unequal, and reserved for only select communities with existing knowledge and funding to draw up their own plan.
• 865 of the total have been “made” and a further 16 have passed referendum (34%)
1110
• 2612 areas are designated and can or have pro gressed Neighbourhood Plans; 9 were revising a “made” neighbourhood plan
It also seems to represent the potential for London to truly develop and be led by the people compared to other regions, but it’s still out of reach for London res idents. We began to try to analyze and study existing community planning in London, to try to find deeper information on this kind of problem in London.
- Neighborhood Planning in London “Neighbourhood-Planning
LONDON IS DIFFERENT
First, we can see that the vast majority of neighbour hood plans in the rest of England are set by established parish or town councils, while London has only one Queen’s Park Community Council. At the same time, London’s complex administrative structure and 3-level development plan system have also forced communities to implement the neighbourhood plan in the form of a forum. At the same time Neighbourhood Planning is a long term process, making it harder for people to par ticipate in a plan that takes three to four years or more due to the frequent population changes in London.
Progress & Proportion in England”
Eleven years after the promulgation of the Localism Act in 2011, England has so far designated more than 2,600 Neighborhood Areas and nearly 1,000 neighbour hood plans, but London is seriously behind the country in implementing the Neighbourhood planning. We can see that although London accounts for 16% of the total population of England, it is only 3% of the plans that have been made.[8]
1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in LondonTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 1. London is Different 1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in LondonTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 1. London is Different - Charpter 1 -
1312
In an attempt to quantify the propensity to implement neighborhood plans in each NA area, extensive reading and analysis of neighborhood plans was conducted. We pre-set four scoring items for key content that often appear in NP, namely GI: Green and Infrastructure, HH: Residential and Heritage, SF: Services and Facilities, and BE: Business and Employment.
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. The 4 Types of Neighborhood Plan in London Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. The 4 Types of Neighborhood Plan in London - Charpter 1 -
TYPE HERITAGE2: AND HOUSING (HH)
This type focuses on housing issues and architectural issues in the Neighborhood Area. There are usually divided into two parts in the Neighborhood Plan: the requirements for residential housing and the protection of cultural heritage in the community, and the detailed provisions in the plan usually include requirements for more afforda ble and affordable housing (It usually exists in communities with a more modest economy), balance the proportion of private residential development and social welfare housing or expect a unified architectural style (focusing defi nition of colors, windows, facades, etc.)
THE RANKING SYSTEM
In each scoring content, we collect, evaluate and score through various channels such as the homepage of the neigh borhood forum in each NA area, social media, neighborhood plan manuscripts, and meeting minutes published by the neighborhood forum. The score is 1 (lowest level) to 5 (highest priority)
TYPE GREEN1:AND INFRASTRUCTURE (GI)
How we score:
In the Neighborhood Plan, Residents’ desire for infrastructure, including better transportation facilities, parking spaces, and more bicycle lanes. as well as specific needs for green space and the environment within the neighbour hood (often requiring more or protection of existing spaces, expectations to address noise and air pollution, and con straints on future developers, such as guarantees of green rates in future development areas and while participat ing). We combine the green and infrastructure requirements in the Neighborhood Plan based on the fact that both are requirements and defining frameworks for the development of physical space within the Neighborhood Area.
“Neighborhood Planning Stage for each Neighborhood Areas and the Corresponding Type Ranking List” - Neighborhood Planning in London1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London 1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London @Roman Road Bow Neighborhood Plan & Social Media from Norwood Planning @Church Street Regeneration 1514
At the same time, we further analyzed and collated typical strategies and design approaches to the most important goals and problems in different types of community planning. In this way, we explore the potential relationship between the content of the plan and the universal needs.
The Neighborhood Plan focuses on the needs of the community, including but not limited to providing medical and health facilities in the community, elderly-friendly services, more children’s play spaces, a certain street needs more nighttime lighting facilities and increase the number of schools. At the same time, in the Neighborhood Plan, there are existing problems in the community but no specific solutions can be proposed, including community safe ty, crime rate, youth drug problems, etc.
Take the Beddington North Neighbourhood Area, for example, especially for Neighbourhood Planning in the draft stage, which includes ambitious green and infrastructure road remodeling plans for the commu nity’s internal roads, including additional green belts and pedestrian-friendly bike paths.
TYPE SERVICES3: AND FACILITIES (SF)
GI -
Church Street project[9]: for the renovation of the traditional residential area, the Neighbourhood Plan provides for a controlled ratio of social housing to price controlled social development in the future. Further details on the development of the neighbour hood are provided in the Neighbourhood Development Document, which sets out specific information on the appearance of new developments, floor area ratios and other indicators.
TYPE BUSINESS4: AND EMPLOYMENT (BE)
SFNEIGHBOURHOODCHURCHSTREETAREA - Neighborhood Planning in London1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London 1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London @Roman Road Trust & Healthy Tooting @Beddington North Neighbourhood Plan @Church Street Neighbourhood Plan @Church Street Neighbourhood Plan @Roman Road Bow Neighbourhood Plan @Neighborhood Plan and Social Media for Drummond Street 1716
Church Street Triangle Square Market[10]: As a historic market place and a local cultural icon, the Neighbourhood Forum is concerned with the main tenance of this part of the space. It is hoped that the local market will develop further, and therefore the Neighbourhood Forum’s detailed project doc ument refers to a project to renovate the space for community services in order to be able to provide better services and facilities from the community for the local market.
The part of the Neighborhood Plan on promoting economic development usually refers to supporting local enterpris es, developing retail or specialty industries within the community, and hoping to achieve the purpose of increasing tourism revenue through some kind of development project. At the same time, only part of the plan will mention the local employment rate, but usually a specific solution cannot be proposed within the Neighborhood Plan.
NEIGHBOURHOODNORTHAREA HHNEIGHBOURHOODCHURCHSTREETAREA
etc.The
Most Neighbourhood Forums do not have a strong ability to influence large scale businesses and the Neighbour hood Plan focuses more on local retail and small businesses to compensate for local employment. The design of the high street therefore tends to control the overall appearance in the document and to provide more commercial services: small street level gathering places, urban furniture
TYPICAL SOLUTIONS BEDDINGTON
- Charpter 1Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. The 4 Types of Neighborhood Plan in London Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3. Typical Solution of 4 Types of Demands
CALCULATIONCLUSTERING MODE
Using the kmeans algorithm to compare the four type of scores of each Neighborhood Area, Neighborhood Forum and Neighborhood Plan in the early stage with the corresponding area’s Income and Index of Multi ple Deprivation (IMD): determined by comprehensive indicators such as education, income, environment, etc. correspond. As the numerical output of the plane coor dinate system, the two indices are expected to be found in the final output image. Whether the four scores we quantified and local conditions (education, environment, income, population, crime, etc. indices and rank) show a clear correlation (positive correlation and sub-correla tion)
K-Means for Services and Facilities (SF)
K-Means Settings in Python
1918
K-Means for Green and Infrastructre (GI) K-Means for Heritage and Housing (HH)
INCOME INCOME IMD IMD - Neighborhood Planning in London -
The score value (GI, HH, SF, BE) is presented as a pos itive integer from 1 to 5. In order to measure the pro pensity of each item in the corresponding Neighborhood Forum in a single Neighborhood Plan, the four items are scored. The value with the highest value is extract ed separately to give 1 as the tendency direction of the main neighborhood plan of Neighborhood Forum, and the percentage of the remaining three values in the sum of the three items is the quantification of the tendency of the remaining three values in the neighborhood plan.
CONCLUSION
K-Means for Business and Employment (BE)
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 4. K-Means Clustering Machine Learning Analysis with different factors of London
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 4. K-Means Clustering Machine Learning Analysis with different factors of London - Charpter 1 -
INCOMEIMD
INCOMEIMD
1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London
1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London
Unfortunately, the overall value is too indistinguishable from the plane coordinate distribution, either because the scores are not very discriminative, or because the overall data we use for comparison contains too many double-considered indices. The experimental results deviate from what we initially expected: the propensity and score of the Neighborhood Plan will show some correlation with the local index. It can be seen from the graphs that the scoring conclusions from GI, HH, SF, and BE are too concentrated and the extreme values on the right side in the distribution.
In order to be more able to confirm the correlation between the neighborhood planning tendency of each community and the various values in the IMD multiple deprivation index, we used Matrix to visualize the gis export csv table. It can be found from the figure that the correlation between the overall neighborhood plan score and the various values in the IMD is weak, and the value fluctuates between 0.25 and -0.25.
- Charpter 1Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 5. Grasshopper Clustering Visualization Analysis of Neighborhood Plans Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 6. Correlation Matrix Analysis of Development Factors in London
EXPLORE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN DIFFERENT FACTORS AND TYPES
K-MEANS CLUSTERING SPATIAL VISUALIZATION
First, the dataset files of the original running system are combined to establish the range of values under each heading. Through Grasshopper K-Means, the existing neighbourhoods in London are visually distributed in the clustering. Mapping and classification of clustering in the coordinate system for each Neighborhood Area. The diagram shows the clustering and classification of Neighborhood Area in the coordinate system for each list with similar values But we found that the classification relationship of the computer-calculated neighborhood plan’s clustering was far from the four different categories of clustering we preset.
- Neighborhood Planning in London1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London 1.3 The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London “Clustering for 8 “ClusteringTypes”Test”“IMD Input Settings” “Correlation Matrix of Multi-Factors and 4 Types of Neighborhood Plan in London” 2120
- Neighborhood Planning in London1.3 The
Scope: Fortunately, most of the communities we con tacted were very interested in our proposal, and they also wanted a better engagement tool for residents. However, different demands lead to different demand for tools in each neighborhood forum, including the expectation of better translation of text to lower the threshold for dissemination of draft neighborhood plans (Roman Road Forum), and public consultation on specific upcoming projects. Vote & Suggest (Lee Forum) etc. Struggles of Neighborhood Planning in London The Struggles of Neighborhood Planning with Different Forum
in London 7. Interview with Neighborhood Forums 7. Interview with Neighborhood Forums “Meetings
1.3
Members” 2322
- Charpter 1Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
INTERVIEW PROGRESS
Purpose: We contacted Neighborhood Forums at different stages and with different basic community conditions to conduct interviews to collect the most pressing and real needs of people in different neigh borhoods and different neighborhood planning stages (focusing on the part where people participate).
2.2 Dynamic Model - List of Inequalities Found in Neighbourhood Planning -
“Rich Community with High Basic Attributes”
Basic attributes (fixed attributes) influence to some extent the quantity and quality of the type of costs that can be invested. The quality and variety of the costs in vested will influence the conversion rate of each action (dynamic input, consisting of three aspects: the amount of money the community invests in the project, the time it is willing to spend and the level of public participa tion). A forum with good basic attributes can afford to
BASIC ATTRIBUTES & DYNAMIC INPUT
2524
However, the inequality of neighborhood planning is more prominent due to the large disparities in the underlying attributes of different communities, and we will further demonstrate this issue based on interviews and reports at each neighborhood planning stage.
Neighbourhood Plans in different forums reflect differ ent levels of protection and capacity for autonomous development. These capacities are determined by their own conditions (basic attributes), including the average income of the local population, the average level of ed ucation, the level of enthusiasm for the Neighbourhood Plan, social power, political status and ethnic diversity, etc.
“Poor Community with Low Basic Attributes”
invest quality costs to achieve the desired results. A forum with poor basic attributes, on the other hand, has a limited quality and variety of costs to invest, and therefore the end result is a poorly protected and developed community. This ultimately determines the different development-preservation forms of the forum. Bridging the financial and technical gaps, saving time and increasing the level of community engagement is a potential way forward to bridge the existing Neighbour hood Planning without changing the basic attributes inherent in the community.
SupportersActiveConformingAuthorities InterventionistSupportersActive & resistant authoritiesDesert ConformingAreaAuthorities “4 Type of Attitudes of Local Authorities”
2726
DIFFERENT ATTITUDES OF THE OFFICIAL AND RECORDS
“Recordings of Feedback from Neighborhood Forums”
The last type is the ‘Desert Area’, where the local council issues little or no information and advice on the neighborhood plan.
Support from the councils varied. Most members were negative about their relationship with the local council. This was mentioned by the chair of the LEE commu nity when we spoke to her, and the Grove Park Forum fought against Lewisham Council for a considerable period of time. Stephen Kenny, Chair of the Grove Park Forum, said that Lewisham Council had prevented the Grove Park Forum from receiving an extra £50,000 to become a ‘front runner’ (A small number of forums
emphasized the importance of maintaining a strong relationship with forums in Camden. He explained that one reason for limited support from some Councils is that they often have limited resources themselves, with small planning policy teams, and that support they pro vide to neighbourhood planning draws resources away from other areas. Councils receive no dedicated funding for Neighbourhood Planning yet are liable for the costs of running referendums and examinations of the plans. In addition to limited funding, Stephen Kenny said, ‘planning committees do not have the knowledge. There needs to be an evidence based education for them so that they can make informed decisions especially after a general election when a planning committee member with absolutely no knowledge whatsoever about plan ning, is being led by an officer whose mandate is about compensation…’
ing Authorities’, which provide ‘Conforming’ informa tion about neighborhood planning on their websites, even if they are less enthusiastic about neighborhood planning. “The third type of municipality is the ‘Con forming Authorities’. The third type of municipality is the ‘Interventionist & resistant authorities’, which place additional hurdles and criteria on top of the normal application criteria for resident community groups, requiring them to provide information that goes well beyond the legally specified criteria.
In the course of our interviews we further confirmed that the help given by different councils and local planning authorities is completely different. Even in a generally bureaucratic and lengthy process, the feedback from the Westminster area was most posi tive, whereas a Forum such as LEE, which spans two different Boroughs, Levisham and Greenwich, is quite difficult to receive active and prompt help from govern ment departments.
The second type of municipality is known as ‘Conform
received additional funding to be ‘frontrunners’ to en courage early designation) to encourage the designation of neighborhood forums and developments.[13]
2.3 Evidence & DiscussionTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 1. Supports from Borough & LPA - Charpter 2 - - List of Inequalities Found in Neighbourhood Planning -
Firstly, the responsiveness of local government to the neighborhood Plan is one of the reasons for the slow progress of community development in London and for making NPing a Dummy. London’s Boroughs can be divided into four categories.[11] Firstly ‘active sup porters’, which are Boroughs that actively provide a forum and area designation for residents and where the community and local government can communicate and interact Buildingeffectively.astrongrelationship with the local council could be an opportunity. The fact that Camden Council supports neighborhood planning could explain why a third of neighborhood plans are in the borough, con firms Roger Winfield, chair of the Kentish Town Neigh borhood Forum, who has been very helpful from his forum’s point of view. and provide ‘help’ and ‘encourage the development of neighborhood planning’.[12]
Councils are limited by funds and planning officers may not have the necessary knowledge.[14] Brian O’Donnell
However,years.[16]
In addition, the Neighborhood Area designation shows that in two areas, Marylebone and Pimlico, there are phenomena worthy of consideration. In these two areas we can clearly see a clear boundary created by the superimposition of different conditions. Marylebone and Pimlico, which should have been designated as a neighborhood as a whole, have been divided into the Marylebone neighborhood Area and the Church Street neighborhood Area, and the Pimlico neighborhood Area and the These less favourable areas were excluded from the “good” plan at the outset.
“Pimlico and Marylebone Witnessed Unequal Neighborhood Area Designation”
2.3 Evidence
As we mentioned in the previous chapters, we can see that the vast majority of Neighborhood Planning in the rest of England is made by established parish or town councils, whereas London has only one Queen’s Park Coummunity Council. small towns and villages have distinct boundaries, usually determined by the bounda ries of the parish councils in the area. The designation of neighborhood planning areas is therefore relatively straightforward. In contrast, London is a large and com plex urban area where ‘relevant bodies’ with common needs may simultaneously cross local authority bounda ries in a dispersed and fluid manner, making neighbor hood planning areas more difficult to form.
forming neighborhood forums and boroughs, and in ongoing planned developments. The complexity of Lon don’s communities means that in London, each borough will contain several different communities, and commu nities can often cross borough boundaries.[15]
DIFFICULT TO BUILD THE COLLECTIVE & Discussion
...
it is worth noting that Neighborhood Forums have been designated and community plans completed in many different lo cations, both geographically and economically.
“UK
CHURCHILL GARDENS
CHURCH STREET
The difficulty of establishing NFs is also linked to the aforementioned level of support from the LPA, whose rejection of local NF propos als has led to the aspirations of an emerging forum being crushed at the first step, and these communi ties without established NFs are referred to as ‘orphan communities’. Orphan area designations are often the result of disputes between the forum and the designating body, or between local groups. A great deal of time and effort is wasted. In most of the above cases, it seems clear that the local authorities would like to see the designation rejected and that no neighbourhood plan should be implemented.[17]
2.3 Evidence & Discussion
THE BEGINNING OF THE DIFFICULTY
This difference can also be partly attributed to London’s local government structure, with the Borough nestled between the Neighborhood Forum and the Greater London Authority. This can create new challenges when
- Charpter 2 - - List of Inequalities Found in Neighbourhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. Stage of Designation of Neighborhood Area Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3. Stage of Designation of Neighborhood Forum
Rent Price” 2928
In the second phase of Neigh borhood Planning, people also face different problems. London’s cultural and demographic diversity also provides significant challenges for Neighborhood Planning. Over all, London has a higher proportion of renters than the rest of the UK, which tends to result in a more transient population, making it more difficult for people to engage in plan-making that takes four or more
Basic Attributes” 3130
- Charpter 2 - - List of Inequalities Found in Neighbourhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3. Stage of Designation of Neighborhood Forum Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3. Stage of Designation of Neighborhood Forum
2.3 Evidence & Discussion 2.3 Evidence & Discussion “Active
At the same time, it is important to have a clear and visionary constitution for the future maintenance of the forum at the time of the neighborhood forum designation. Choosing the right type of legal structure for the forum will also play an important role in the future use of community funds, the application of grants and the operation of the However,membership.while the ‘average’ neighborhoods are still struggling to meet the basic requirements for a neighborhood forum, the ‘good’ neighborhoods have already made a fantastic start to the future of their neighborhoods. As we can see, in Belgravia, the committee members of the forum are the elite from all walks of life, whose work and place of
Member
Density” “Constitution
residence undoubtedly places them at the very centre of power in the area, and who make the most of the potential diversity and capability of the neighborhood forum. In contrast, in the Crouch Hill and Hornsey Rise neighborhood Forum, the instability brought about by the initial membership and the constitution, along with the death of many of the area’s leading members after the epidemic, led to the complete stagnation of the entire forum and its dissolu tion Boroughs based Population of Neighborhood
Forums”
... Yet another complication is the reaction of an area to the creation of a forum in a neighborhood: “There are other forums in my ward, so we have to have one, don’t we?” It is therefore argued that the threat posed by neighbouring communities developing policies that may affect other districts has led to reactive action by neigh bouring districts. Each designated community area can only generate one community plan and forum. The ability of the forum to cross the first hurdle is further hampered by the fact that local authorities are placed in a difficult and time-consuming mediation role due to competing applications from different groups with overlapping geographical boundaries.[18]
on
It is reported that those interested in holding a neigh borhood forum under the new system were clustered in the city centre, with 46% of people in the boroughs of Westminster and Camden expressing interest in setting up a community forum to date. Many reasons can explain this concentration of interest and activity. Bor
“Comparison of Neighborhood Forum and
2.3 Evidence & Discussion
3332
Only communities that are “trusted” by local agencies can get CIL amounts that can really help at any stage. The truth is, when you’re still being rejected or reduc
- Charpter 2 - - List of Inequalities Found in Neighbourhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 4. Stage of Evidence Review Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 4. Stage of Evidence Review
of Community Infrastructure Levy(CIL), efficiently and quickly achieving the desired results.
THE EFFECTS OF DYNAMIC INPUTS (TIME, MONEY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT) ARE AFFECTED
2.3 Evidence & Discussion
For example, the Westbourne Neighborhood Forum, they are about to start a evidence-based review, but the information used is still a resident survey collected 5 years ago. In contrast, the “successful” Marylebone community hired professionals from different fields to identify problems in the region through the perfect use
In the early days of Neighborhood Planning, for the average neighborhood community. Lengthy and bureau cratic interactions with local planning authorities, oc casional humanitarian help from technical members of local professional bodies and forums, allow site informa tion to be professionally collected and fed back in years.
ing the amount of CIL for a community meeting, other forums are already getting a large amount of CIL for real projects.
2.3
3534
Planning Aid for London (PLA) said that some of the [Neighborhood Planning Applications] being undertak en in Camden could take up to three years and that it would cost between £80,000 and £100,000 to produce
them.[22] At the end of the process, a referendum would be held - a Queen’s Park Parish Council ref erendum, the size of a community, at a cost of £23,000 Cost implications are significant. If all the community forums were to reach the final stage, plus the cost of salaries for “at least a small number of planners” over the next few years, Westminster alone would face a referendum bill of £500,000. So funding is very limited.
- Charpter 2 - - List of Inequalities Found in Neighbourhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 5. The Usage of Community Infrasturcture Levy Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 5. The Usage of Community Infrasturcture Levy
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a levy devel oped for new infrastructure to help address this need In most parts of England, local parishes can decide how they spend their money, and if they have a neighbor hood plan they can get 25% up to 15%. If they don’t, they encourage parishes to develop a scheme levy part of which must be spent on the communities they collect.
At[20]the
CONTROL OF RESOURCES AND POWER
Instead, in one case ‘too much’ money went to a commu nity (by their own admission), even though the area was not obliged to accept it. Although there are some cases where CIL has provided significant amounts of money to communities, the vast majority of community ques tionnaire respondents (84%) indicated that CIL was ei ther not an incentive or did not apply to their situation because they had not allocated land for development to generate CIL income.[21]
Funding[23]
conditions are too rigid, and availability of additional funding is variable. Jane Briginshaw said the new criteria made it harder to secure grant fund ing, ‘Because of this new business about what you can
same time, however, the Community Infrastruc ture Levy arrangement remains a controversial issue locally, in some areas. As many local conservation areas do not have a CIL schedule, it does not benefit or act as an incentive for many community planning areas.
spend it on, we have to contort ourselves.[24] Some forums also successfully secured funding beyond the government grants (between £9,000 and £17,000). For example, the Greater Carpenters forum secured grants from Trust for London, Loretta Lees, London Tenants Federation and UCL’s Engineering Exchange.[25] How ever, availability of additional funding can vary, and the process of seeking it can be time consuming. Jane Briginshaw had ten meetings with Wandsworth Council to seek the 2,000 shortfall that her forum needed but had no success.[26]
2.3 Evidence & Discussion Evidence & Discussion
DISCUSS POTENTIAL AND THE FUTURE Evidence Discussion
In a situation where innate local fundamentals can not be easily changed, the time cost spent, the level of community engagement, and the amount of funding and technical support obtained are the only potential research directions that can reduce the obstacles that disadvantaged communities encounter in exercising power and chasing their dreams.
In the following chapters, we will give our views and suggestions on how to improve the results of neighbor hood planning.
2.3
2.3 Evidence & Discussion “Comparison of Neighborhood Plans” 3736
&
SIMILAR CONTENT DOES NOT REPRESENT THE SAME FUTURE
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 6. Contents of Neighborhood Plans Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 6. The Usage of Community Infrasturcture Levy - Charpter 2 - - List of Inequalities Found in Neighbourhood Planning -
1. Lee’s plan is more idealistic in that it identifies the specific roadways and locations that it wants to enhance and provides solutions, which is more targeted and has a more realistic and effective protection; and it has already started the design of the first development project.
Through a longitudinal study of the entire process of neighborhood planning, as well as a horizontal compar ison of the basic attributes and dynamic inputs between neighborhood forums at the same stage. We have a deeper understanding and appreciation of how neigh borhood planning, so-called “new power of the people,” continues to exacerbate inequalities in urban devel opment. As mentioned earlier in this section, in the process of developing neighborhood planning, the key factors that determine the ultimate quality of neigh borhood planning are the basic properties of the place and the dynamic input. Communities with high social status, more power and resources, and highly educated residents have easy access to financial and technical support from governments and institutions. Converse
The Neighborhood Plans of the different forums reflect different levels of protection and self-development.
2. In contrast, the Highgate plan only specifies a general area and sets out development restrictions, without specif ic proposals for specific sites and areas.
ly, marginalized community groups with few resources and incomes struggle to exercise what is known as the “right to bottom-up development”.
3. Roman road has a specific development policy and project plan, but no funding to bring it to fruition.
Task 5. How to attract those special groups that are important in the community but generally diffi cult to cooperate with through a certain software or platform to better communicate with NF
3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood Planning2
However, from another point of view, differences in fac tors such as education, income, and social background lead to community planning that is not available to all, and a large number of people at the bottom are not yet involved, which may help exacerbate inequality. Studies have shown that the rise in homelessness in the UK after Localism Act 2011 illustrates the disad vantage of localist policymaking to marginalized groups in society.[27] On the other hand, the state has dele gated “services” to municipalities and regional groups, but it is usually only a cost diversion rather than a real decentralization of power and financial autonomy, that is, responsibility is decentralized, not money for the performance of its duties.[28] In the absence of sufficiently sustainable financial and technical support, existing neighborhood planning organizations have too many responsibilities while volunteering; long bureau cratic interactions with local planning departments make it impossible to get really effective help for Neigh borhood Plans; even the quality of completed com munity Plans is far from the same, and without real financial resources and official support, all the content written in community plans can only be the beautiful fantasies of the people of the region, once returning to the traditional Public Private Partnership devel opment model, External developers can still use their wealth of experience to squeeze benefits from within the community. Therefore, it is necessary to explore the potential tools for autonomous development within community planning, and this essay will discuss a more radical combination of development models, New NP+ formed by Neighborhood Planning, Community Wealth Building and Public Common Partnership, to create the ideology and local development of true democratic autonomy that follows.
TASK 3. How to use a certain platform so that the final generated NP can be converted into a version that is easier to understand, so that people who participate in voting can truly understand the fu ture of the community, and at the same time allow more people to participate.
Task 1. How to convert professional and complex planning information into a simple and easy-to-un derstand form for non-professional auditors in NF through a certain platform or facility, so that they can be more autonomous without the frequent help of LPA officials review these data.
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
for Institutional Framework 3938
Task 7, How to modify and strengthen the existing neighborhood planning organizational structure from the institutional framework and find a new sustainable development structure.
The Community Wealth Building(CWB) model has ex cellent potential in terms of the scale of development of a local region and the structural and systemic support for the economic aspects of neighborhood planning. Emergencies such as the covid-19 epidemic and climate crisis have, in different ways, exposed the fundamental dysfunction of the UK national and local economy and the failure of the existing economic system to deliver economic, environmental and social justice for the planet, people and places.[29] In recent years power and responsibility for economic development in the UK has been shifting from local authorities to local enterprise partnerships, with speculative development further exacerbating regional gentrification and locally entrenched systemic poverty and deprivation. CWB is an effective tool for changing this situation at the local level and achieving social and economic justice. Rather than pursuing “Growth at all costs,” it seeks to adjust the makeup of the local economy itself so that wealth is widely held, shared, and democratized. The CWB attempts to shift the direction of local economies from “wealth extraction” to “community common wealth building”; from “environmental extraction” to “environ mental management”; from “financialized and highgrowth sectors” to “real economy and everyday econo my”; from “productivity” to “satisfactory employment”; from “supporting private enterprises” to “supporting democratic economies”, and so on. [30]
Term
AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
Central government has been hoarding and centraliz ing power in the areas of planning and construction for a long time. A range of economic exploitation, racial in equality, gentrification, social cleansing and the climate crisis have affected people’s lives through profit-orient ed extractive development in partnership with external developers. The impact of social security cuts, housing market pressures and reduced funding for local govern ment has forced the state to throw more responsibility back on local government, expecting people to solve problems through their own democratic cooperation and participation. On an ideal level, the Localism Act 2011, through Neighborhood Planning, empowers residents to develop the future potential of their own communities from the bottom up and to take ownership of their own needs. On the one hand, it sets a new policy framework for unscrupulous developers through the Neighborhood Plan, and on the other hand, through the Neighborhood Development Order, it empowers the community the potential to be an internal developer and develops itself in a simpler and more efficient process.
3.1 Objectives
THE DESIRED TARGETS
Task 2. How to convert the simple results of discus sions between NF and the masses into professional and complex planning information through a cer tain platform or facility to LPA’s technical support staff, so that they can have more confidence that the community can produce effective and correct planning solutions.
The key is the ‘anchor’ institution, for running the CWB by identifying and bringing together local influential institutions and groups. Local organizations such as schools, hospitals, local authorities, clubs, etc. spend millions of pounds each year on goods and services, but the additional benefit of this spending to the local economy is limited.[31] They can have a huge positive impact on the region by commissioning and buying goods and services within the community, through their workforce and employability and through creative use of local facilities and land assets.[32]
IDEA 1. INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK CHANGE -
‘NEW NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING +’
- Charpter 3 - - Change & Hypothsis -
The goal is to focus on the future of communities that can help the weak and small with different underlying attributes and to continue to develop indigenous bottom-up communities efficiently and freely. Time, funding technology and community engagement related issues are the most direct and effective help. We have gradually summarized the following main tasks:
Task4. How to reduce the information gap between community residents with different majors, differ ent sources, different education levels and other factors by some means, so that more people can fully and suggestively understand the power they have, and at the same time obtain Wanted informa tion about NP.
Task 6, How to let more people understand and participate in neighborhood planning, further expose and expose the inequalities in the devel opment of existing planning, so that people can consciously understand the gaps between small and weak individuals and regions.
From the outset, the ‘anchor’ led approach has provided utility to justice movements. For example, a central aspect of the Cleveland Model in the US is the use of procurement and spending of an anchor institution to provide financial support for the green cooperative movement. A large worker-owned and community-gain enterprise model, worker cooperatives, supply local in stitutions, such as hospitals, councils and universities, that are jointly owned and operated by their members to keep profits localized for mutual benefit.[33] By creating multiple ownership of the economy, local employee ownership results in decisions being made for the benefit of the local community rather than going into the pockets of external shareholders and investors, with profits being reinvested in the community, local employment or distributed as dividends to each ordi nary member. ...
Author: Guang1.YangIdeas
Fig.1.
3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood Planning
life. By developing distributed forms of governance, people at the bottom can be fundamentally closer to the decisions that concern them. The ability of national governments to shape the social and collective environ ment is no longer too strong and centralized, and this power is decentralized and distributed outward to more ordinary people. Through this new form, urban dwellers can become collective decision-makers, moving away from simply being coerced by oligarchs and politicians as consumers or voters.[38] In a way, this is very simi lar to Localism Act 2011 and the ideal of neighborhood planning to empower people. ...
Fig.2. Structure of Joint Enterprise, @Common Wealth
helps neighborhood planning opening up new possibil ities in terms of how infrastructure and public service projects can be developed. A popular tool that is now used worldwide for infrastructure and public servic es such as transport, water and sewerage, energy, environmental protection and public health is the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) (Fig.1).[34] How ever, the controversy surrounding the privatization of community project assets by private developers is also ongoing, and the accumulation of wealth by a few does not change the inequality within communities. At the same time, PPPs require collaboration to work, but the most important goal of PPP projects is often to achieve coordination, coherence and co-production, rather than consensus on decision-making.[35] Collective decision-making is secondary in PPPs, which further exacerbates the conflict between community infra structure projects developed by large companies and local interests and demands. For example, the Harin gey Development Vehicle programme, which has been cancelled, involves £2 billion worth of social assets to be transferred. The proposed redevelopment plan by pri vate developer Lendlease would demolish 1,400 council houses from 7 estates and replace them with luxury developments and so-called ‘affordable’ houses. There is no doubt that once this PPP project is implemented, a new round of social cleansing and gentrification will hurt the people of Haringey.
3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood Planning2
On the other hand, Public Common Partnership (PCP)
Term
... The first principle is the Joint Enterprise (Fig.2), in which the state agent (e.g. local councils) and the com mon associations (e.g. mixed cooperatives or community interest companies) are the principal members. They support, collaborate, co-manage and own a community asset with the organizations (e.g. trade unions, environ mental agencies, tenant groups and specialist groups) that run the PCP project. At the same time, each shareholder member has only a single vote, regardless of the number of shares they own and the background they come from. The second principle is ‘distributed democratic control of surplus value’, whereby when a PCP project is formally operational, the profits accu mulated through earnings are retained by the Joint Enterprise and are under the collective control of the board of directors. It can then go on to develop the next self-expanding circuit of democratic governance based on new community assets, achieving a virtuous circle of communalisation and democratic ownership. (Fig.3)
AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 - Charpter 3 - - Change & Hypothsis -
Most importantly, the primary use of any surplus managed by the Joint Enterprise is to capitalise other PCP pro jects without expectation of financial return. Projects with clear profit potential, such as energy, water, housing and transport infrastructure, are excellent starting points for PCPs, and thus continue to drive new PCP circuits.[39]
From a fair and justice perspective, the UK’s economic transformation and local economic green recovery focus around ownership, control, democracy, participation and green transformation.[36] Thus, the Public Com mon Partnership offers a new possibility. PCP offers an alternative institutional design that frees us from the simple market-state dualism. Instead, they involve shared ownership between local authorities and civilian organizations, as well as shared governance with spe cific stakeholders in the project.[37] As one of the core elements of the socialist change project, PCP not only affected the direct redistribution of wealth and power, but also had a positive impact on the development of collective autonomy and the decommodification of daily
1. Ideas for Institutional Framework1. Ideas for Institutional Framework
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
Fig.3.Centrifugal Finance Dynamic Development of PCPs, @Common Wealth
Different Levels of Private Sector Engagement in PPP Contracts, @Wikipedia
4140
... CWB is going to influence key sectors such as local planning, capital investment, energy, transport and housing, and within this, planning and capital invest ment, as common areas of community planning, allow CWB to play a considerable role in helping Neighbor hood Planning to thrive. Through the CWB’s three of five core principles of ‘Progressive Procurement of Goods and Services’, ‘Making Financial Power Work for Local Places’ and ‘Fair Employment and Just Labor Markets’. A better solution to one of the most significant problems faced by community forums when undertaking community planning, the lack of sufficient funding for the development and maintenance of the actual projects in the community plan. The progres sive procurement of contracts for community planning projects into smaller bids has facilitated the partici pation of local small and medium-sized engineering enterprises, the third sector, cooperatives and social enterprises, both to minimize construction costs and to keep development profits within the community. At the same time, by ‘ Making Financial Power Work for Local Places ‘, certain neighborhood planning projects with public investment value allow local authorities and competent anchor institutions to establish coopera tive investment funds or local banks, for example using regional pension funds to invest in local public services and infrastructure.
With the designation of the Neighborhood Forum, it inherently has the ability to become an agent of the state (as a legitimate owner of public assets) and a common association as mentioned above. We can see that the concept of public assets and ownership is crucial in running the PCP. Both changes to private and privatization and collective control of community assets and resources can help to mitigate systemic injustices and crises. Community Asset Transfer (CAT) allow for the transfer of ownership of land or assets belonging to government and local authorities to the local community. Among the groups that can apply for a CAT, neighborhood forums are the perfect vehicle for this, as they have the legal right to change the nature of the land via Site Allocation written in Neighborhood Plan, which will maximize the community’s collective desire for transformation. At the same time, the CAT process involves different or overlapping tasks for different community assets, such as property man agement, surveying, legal, insurance, park and green space management, etc. The unified management and application of the neighborhood forum will greatly ease the organizational costs and participation efforts of the different interest groups within the community. In addition, the range and quality of data recorded and presented in asset registers of land and buildings held by most authorities varies considerably, from green spaces to exhibi tion halls to skyscrapers. When trying to understand the history of these assets, how they have been used, their use conditions, reasons for special circumstances, constraints, property rights and various information, this information is not readily available and needs to be collected and collated by the neighborhood forum to produce an ARCHIVE for use in each project. Subsequently, once the neighborhood forum has acquired sufficient ownership and man agement of the community assets, the two main members of the PCP ‘ Joint Enterprise’ can be replaced by the neighborhood forum in a more holistic structure, working with the organizations involved in the operation of each individual PCP project to run the PCP more efficiently. At the same time, when some PCP projects are completed, it can become the new ‘anchor’ institution for local employment creation and procurement needs. A community fo rum with ownership of multiple anchor institutions could become a ‘Core & Mega’ anchor institution not currently mentioned or imagined in CWB model, and thus lead the community into a new future in a more collective form. ...
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
“Process of Community Infrastructure Levy”
4342
3. Consider developing a community plan led by social policy and projects rather than just planning projects (cen tral government). ...
2. Ideas for Community Infrastructure Levy & 3. Ideas Summary from Reports1. Ideas for Institutional Framework
... Thus, we can see that with the help of the PCP and CWB, a more bottom-up form of neighborhood planning, New NP+, has been born. At the same time, the current responsibilities of the neighborhood forum seem to be too fragmented and complex. And we need to orientate its main responsibilities more towards the coordination and management of residents’ participation and collective intentions, as an aid and catalyst for ‘Joint Enterprise’. (Fig.4) The voluntary nature of the Forum members’ work could gradually be transformed into a non-commercial, paid service that would further strengthen the forum’s ability to manage and finance local assets. In addition, the content of the community plan could further detail the content and timeline of its PCP projects and, thanks to the NDO, each identified project following the Plan Referendum could be responded to and implemented quickly.
3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood Planning
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
1. The Mayor should support existing networks of community and voluntary organisations, boroughs and other interested parties in setting up a neighborhood planning network to support and encourage exploratory work. A scoping meeting to discuss steps forward should take place after the Mayoral election.
The recommendations are based on key findings about the role and potential of neighborhood planning in areas of London with high levels of deprivation and the particular challenges faced by disadvantaged urban neighborhoods. They also consider the different organizations and government agencies that could make each recommendation[40]:
IDEA 2. SUGGESTIONS OF COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY
3. SUMMARY OF SUGGESTIONS FROM OHTER REPORTS
The main source of public funding currently serving the construction of neighborhood planning is CIL. Basically, except for a few areas, CIL funding in most areas is not sufficient to meet the needs of the actual plan, and the forum will eventually need to seek external Funding for support.
We therefore recommend that the use of CIL be shifted more from the later stages of community planning to the early stages, where the use of professional services to fast-track the community planning process can provide a better foundation for community development and where the entry of upfront funding can effectively engage the community. At the same time, higher levels of funding should be considered for communities with significant growth potential or poor
Fig.4. “Transformation of Neighborhood Forum”
- Charpter 3 - - Change & Hypothsis -
Finally, we can imagine that by combining CWB, PCP and democratic community participation, capitalizing on the operation of NP+ does not mean that the wealth and wellbeing of people within the community is equated with money and social status. Collective needs and aspirations and wider social responsibility become the ultimate goal of NP+, and capital interests are no longer equated with a better life, thus making a real difference to people’s future.
2. As neighborhood planning places additional demands upon stretched local authority resources, we recommend that the Local Government Association review the role of local councillors in neighborhood planning and set out some guidelines on what role councillors can, as a minimum, be expected to play.
3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood Planning
7. Reconsider the criteria for additional funding for neigh borhood forums and consider tailored packages of support for urban areas with high levels of deprivation, including: - Re-allocation of government funding for neighborhood forums. - Supplementary grant funding for areas scoring high on the Index of Multiple Deprivation, as the London Forum currently struggles to access additional grant funding and additional technical support packages for
8. Clarify the responsibility of local authorities to ‘support’ neighborhood planning, setting out expected roles and responsibilities in a guidance document with statutory weighting. This should include designating a dedicated focal point for neighborhood planning within the planning team and ensuring that if this changes, the neighborhood forum will be informed (central government, local author
10. Formalise existing knowledge sharing groups through London Councils (local authorities, London Councils) to promote mutual support and peer learning between local authorities and explore how local skills can be linked to neighborhood forums to provide professional accreditation or other benefits for volunteers. The Londoners’ Skills Fund could support local higher education institutions to facilitate these skills exchanges (central government, GLA)
this study suggests that a small workshop is a very useful format (neighborhood Planning London, GLA)
- Charpter 3 - - Change & Hypothsis3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
9.ities)Funding
... 4. Introduce milestone ‘wins’ in the project process to reverse the loss of momentum and provide the potential to unlock additional resources. This could include supporting and upgrading projects identified by neighborhood forums through grant funds, for example: - Good Growth Fund to support growth and community development (Mayor of London). -Citizen-led engagement scheme grants to promote community-led research (Mayor of London, GLA, central government). -Community Infrastructure Levy (local authorities)
urban areas with high levels of socio-economic deprivation (central government)
6. Consider emerging neighborhood Plans and their prior ities in the Local Plan and make it clear that integrating neighborhood plans is part of the soundness test for local plans. Local plans should support neighborhood plans by making room for neighborhood plan by making space for additional detail for their area (Local Authorities, Town Planning Inspectorate for England)
3. Ideas Summary from Reports3. Ideas Summary from Reports
“Suggestions and Responsible Party for Neighborhood Planning”
5. Simplify the route of the Forum neighborhood Planning process, for example by making the process of applying for initial funding more straightforward to remove barriers to entry (local authorities)
and prioritising peer-to-peer learning activi ties between community forums across London has been very effective but rare, particularly in supporting small workshop-style activities. Feedback from participants in
4544
Open the interface, we will provide a UI & UX interface for the right group of people according to the choice of professional and non-professionals. You can quickly locate your ultimate goal by searching, distributing guidance, and preset questions.
For example, you can browse the major Funding related to the Community right to build order policy tool, such as the Commu nity Infrastructure Levy, you can see how others are using it, as well as the steps and application forms required to apply for the Funding while finding more external technical support on some forms.
Then a few simple options help us better qualify and evaluate the most appropriate tool. At the same time, the interface will also showcase other possible tools. To give you a better understanding of each of the methods and policies that might lead to the estab lishment of your new community center, while at the same time demonstrating the differences between them through case studies. Then, you need to take the next step on the land or building you have acquired. Whether to maintain existing building functions and manage them with the leadership of the community or to build new buildings on vacant land or renovate existing buildings. In addition, you probably want land changed for other types of de velopment? When you finalize the path to establish a new commu nity service center, the Review interface will show all the process es and key policy support needed to achieve the goal, and you can see the financial support and technical tools associated with it in the details of each policy.
IDEA NEIGHBORHOOD4. PLANNING FIGMA GUIDE PLATFORM 4. Ideas for Information Guide4. Ideas for Information Guide “Figma Neighborhood Planning Guidance Demo” 4746
Suppose that in such a community, a group of people who do not understand community planning at all but want to establish a community service center can get informational help through our Figma guidance.
- Charpter 3 - - Change & Hypothsis3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
Based on the task mentioned before, we initially developed a Figa ma Guidance by integrating complex information about Neigh borhood Planning, such as planning processes, application forms, laws and regulations, etc. In a simpler and more intuitive way, residents will be more aware of what tools they can use in neigh borhood Planning and be able to tell the difference between them. At the same time, it can quickly help residents position the policy, economic, and technical support that best suits their goals.
IDEA GENTRIFICATIONCOMMERCIALIZE5. OF GENTRIFICATION
@Cases of Commercilized Gentrification Façade
Edgware
Through our design, people can design any façade they want and post it to the forum for a referendum, with the highest number of votes participating in the actual construction. It will also meet the needs of the Marylebone community for a vibrant and unused space through wall painting.
- Charpter 3 - - Change & Hypothsis3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 5. Ideas for Satire and Expose5. Ideas for Satire and Expose
We then analysed the site factors of the community and expressed what we thought were the problems in this site and the corresponding solutions in the form of façade materials, allowing people to design the façade by simply dragging their fingers through the materials to the different components of the façade. At the same time, the top left corner provides real-time feedback on how people have mitigated various environmental problems in the com munity, such as noise and air pollution, by combining different materials.
Road Assessment, @Marylebone Neighborhood Forum
But in the process of thinking about this may cause gentrification, we found that for wealthy classes and regions, rising house prices and a more gorgeous and glorious atmosphere are acceptable and even pursued, which has to let us go further through this idea. Satire and exposé of neighborhood planning look completely different in the hands of different groups.
“Interface”
If we are obsessed with improving the aesthetics and sustainability of the façade, the design of the façade will drive up the value of the building and cause the price of the building to skyrocket, in which case the owner or developer will inevitably charge more for the occupants/tenants and the scheme will become a capital tool, which is not our intention.
Marylebone has a large number of retail outlets and the cluttered building façade completely ruins the view of edgware road. After we learned about Marylebone, we devised a way to use AR technology to change the building facade with the intention of involving people in the design and changing their own living environment.
4948
In talking to Marylebone we found that one of the big problems they had was that the community was so large and each person had their own opinion, which was difficult to unify and record, so we started with an interactive map where people could enter their postcode to get their location and comment on the existing environment in the community and upload photos. This helps the community to better collect people’s opinions and allows people to see what others have to say about the community.
At the same time, our approach will attract artists to the community, stimulating diversity and artistry in the com munity, and artists can often design better façades.
2 People should be decisive in their needs and trying to change them through play is not the best way to do it.
Along with the data visualisation, we matched the number of needs people had, and more people with the same need increased the durability of the game charac ter’s weapon, indicating more needs. Different numbers of needs correspond to different weapon durability.
3 Not well thought out for developers and owners of meanwhile use space.
At the same time, we analyse the data of this commu nity space in the backend of the system and express what we think are the problems in this space and the corresponding solutions in a game-like way. If people choose these needs, the character they control will have an attack bonus, indicating that their needs are just the right solution to the community’s current problems.
After we learned about Marylebone, we designed a game model for the community, turning site factors into a game setting, allowing local residents to understand the site and identify real collective/individual needs. As you can see from the Marylebone website, they have a lot of trouble with the unused space on Edgware Road, and we wanted to address this through a game ap proach to reuse this meanwhile use space.
the monster dies and the character’s weapon durability approaches 0, it shows that people’s demand can be adapted to the field, but it is not necessarily the best choice, and people can try again with other weapons to learn the most suitable demand conditions that are really adapted to the field.
After designing the game, we reflected on it and found it to be immature and lacking in many areas.
1 Adults are not always willing to play the game to achieve the effect we want, which might be possible if it were children.
Once people have chosen their needs and got their weapons, then the battle begins. Every time the charac ter attacks, the weapon’s durability is reduced and the monster’s life is reduced. When the character’s weapon durability is 0, if the monster has not been defeated, then one’s needs may not be a good solution to these block ing conditions, indicating that one’s needs are not well adapted to the field. At this point people can try another demand and start fighting again.
people initially enter their postcode, they are shown their location on the interface and we process the data to show the nearest 1-2 meanwhile use spaces, to which their needs are corresponding. After pro cessing the data, we match the needs of the different meanwhile use spaces and the needs in the vicinity of the meanwhile use space are ranked according to the number of people providing them, in order to prioritise the needs.
When the monster is dead and the character’s durability is not yet 0, this indicates that people’s needs far out weigh the organisational factors, suggesting that people’s needs are very well adapted to the field, which can give landlords and developers a better idea of the opportunities to make money - after all, a lot of demand means a lot of
After submitting their comments on the community, we provide an interface for people to enter their needs and rank them, which allows us to keep a good record of people’s needs and to further process and visualise the
Afterdata.
Once you have completed the attack power and weapon durability of the game character, it is time for the ene mies. The enemies of people’s demands are undoubtedly the site factors that prevent people from fulfilling their needs, such as the developer’s plans, the history of the building, etc... These are translated into the life points (HP) of the monsters
In talking to Marylebone we found that one of the big problems they had was that the community was so large and each person had their own opinion, which was difficult to unify and record, so we started with an interactive map where people could enter their post code to get their location and comment on the existing environment in the community and upload photos. This helps the community to better collect people’s opinions and allows people to see what others have to say about the
IDEA 6. A “CHASING DEMAND” GAME FOR MEANWHILE USE
“Demand Game Interface” “Demand Game Interface” 5150
- Charpter 3 - - Change & Hypothsis3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3.2 Hypothsis & Tool for Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 6. Ideas for Meanwhile Use6. Ideas for Meanwhile Use
Aftercommunity.this,people
Andrevenue.when
who know more about the commu nity, such as building owners, developers, property developers etc., can add more information through an additional interface, allowing the community to better understand the meanwhile use space.
- Change & Hypothsis3.3 ConclusionTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
In the final part of this Booklet, we have produced, edited, and collated the “Encyclopedia of Neighborhood Planning” for non-professionals and people who want to have a deeper understanding of neighborhood planning, aimng to help everyone.
CONLUSION
5352
also trying to build a new structural direction for the healthy development of the community on top of the existing Educational framework.
In the coming research, we will continue to connect and collaborate with the Marylebone Neighborhood Forum & Lee Neighborhood Forum. Through in-depth research into forums where the two underlying attributes are vastly disparities, continue to tap into neighborhood planning pathways that can lead to “true equality and justice,” even if it may be quite radical.
That’s all of our team’s research on unequal so-called bottom-up neighborhood planning as “Dummy” at this stage. In an ideal world, people are truly empowered to build their homes in more democratic and creative ways that will bring a better future to their communi ties. But by analysing the differences in the political power structure between London and the rest of the UK, and comparing and analyzing horizontal data from existing forums in London, it is clear that the “better future” originally envisioned by neighbour hood planning has not been realized, or not for all. It is still unable to shake off the social shackles of social hierarchy, education level, income between rich and poor, and racial disparities. In the context of this social development, we try to find a fulcrum that can lift this heavy shackles, try to explore feasible solutions that can increase community participation and reduce time, technology and capital costs. At the same time, we are
APPENDIX 4.1: A NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING ENCYCLOPEDIA
The Magic Roadmap on the left shows the reading structure and interrelationships of the subsequent content.
In this last appendix chapter, we’ve collated and edited what you need to know about each pro cess in your neighborhood and tools that might help. Hopefully, readers will be able to use this chapter to find the information and content they need when faced with neighborhood planning questions as they would with an encyclopedia.
4.1 Roadmap for Neighborhood Planning
“Neighborhood Planning Roadmap” 5554
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22
- Appendix -
2.1 Deciding on the neighbourhood area oundary[42]
APPENDIX 4.2.2 -2: GETTING ESTABLISHED A NEIGHBOURHOOD AREA
• Neighbourhood areas (neighbourhood forums). Deciding on the neighbourhood area boundary can be quite challenging in unparished areas. The local planning au thority should be able to provide maps as a starting point. Careful thought needs to be given to the question of ‘what is the local neighbourhood?’ Neighbourhood areas may be large or small. For example, it could contain a town centre, local shops, housing estate, employment area, park or com bination of these things. ...
The area where NPing can be implemented. A “neighbourhood area” means an area within the area of a local planning authority in England which has been designated by the authority as a neighbourhood area; but that power to designate is exercisable only (a)awhere—relevant
APPENDIX 4.2.2 -1: MEANING “NEIGHBORHOODOF AREA”
5756
“Neighborhood Planning Roadmap - Initial Stage”
(b)the authority are determining the application (but see subsection (5)).[41]
- Appendix4.2 Preparation of Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. Designation of a Neighborhood Area
body has applied to the authority for an area specified in the application to be designated by the authority as a neighbourhood area, and
• Neighbourhood areas (town or parish councils). For town or parish councils, there is a presumption that the neighbourhood area will be the same as the parish bound ary. However, they may choose a smaller and more focused area, such as a town or local centre. Clear planning reason ing would be required to support this choice. Also, adjacent parish/ town councils may agree to work in partnership to produce a joint neighbourhood plan.
•include:thename of the neighbourhood forum;
• the purpose of the neighbourhood forum (this needs to include ‘promoting or improving the social, economic and environmental well-being of an area that consists of or includes the neighbourhood area concerned’); working arrangements, including sub-groups, partners and their roles; pattern of meetings and details of how
5958
• Individuals who are elected members of a county council, district council or London borough council any of whose area falls within the neighbourhood area concerned,
section 61F of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 @UK Government
3.1-2. its membership is open to:
It is a good idea to keep the written constitution as con cise, clear and simple as possible. As a guide, it should
Do you see your Neighbourhood Forum as a time-limit ed body operating only until your Neighbourhood Plan is adopted? Alternatively, you may see developing a Neighbourhood Plan as the first step in wider commu nity action to improve your neighbourhood. If you have the latter aim then consider setting up an incorporated structure from the start..
2.3 Key considerations in choosing a legal struc ture
•The powers it needs and any risks it will run.
... When selecting a structure for your Neighbourhood Forum, it is important to consider whether an incor porated or unincorporated structure best meets your needs. This section gives a summary of the key dif ferences. It has links to additional information where relevant.
• Individuals who live in the neighbourhood area concerned,
- Appendix4.2 Preparation of Neighborhood PlanningTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. Designation of a Neighborhood Forum
• Works there (whether for a business carried on there or otherwise), or
3.1-4. it has a written constitution
• Individuals who work there (whether for business es carried on there or otherwise), and
3.1-3. its membership includes a minimum of 21 individuals each of whom—
•The aims of your Neighbourhood Forum
3.1-1 Meeting the legal requirements
It is established for the express purpose of promoting or improving the social, economic and environmental well-being of an area that consists of or includes the neighbourhood area concerned (whether or not it is also established for the express purpose of promoting the carrying on of trades, professions or other businesses in such an area),
• Is an elected member of a county council, district council or London borough council any of whose area falls within the neighbourhood area con cerned,
APPENDIX 4.2.3 -3: GETTING ESTABLISHED A NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM
• Lives in the neighbourhood area concerned,
“Neighborhood Planning Roadmap - Starting Stage” 6160
A neighbourhood plan puts in place planning policy for a neighbourhood area to guide future development. A neighbourhood plan is about the use and development of land and may contain a vision, aims, planning policies, proposals for improving the area or providing new facilities, or allocation of key sites for specific kinds of develop ment. It may deal with a wide range of social, economic and environmental issues (such as housing, employment, design, heritage and transport) or it may focus on one or two issues only.
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 1. Overview of Neighbourhood Plan
APPENDIX 4.3.1: OVERVIEW “NEIGHBORHOODOF PLAN”
4.3 Process of Neighbourhood Plan
- Appendix -
• health and social care organisations;
• Consulting stage: Once a draft plan has been produced, it must be subject to a pre-submission consultation (see later section on Pre-submission consultation).
4.3 Process of Neighbourhood Plan
• Publicity through other local organisations and their networks.
• Statutory requirement.
• Gaining support.
- Appendix -
• Democratic deficit.
• Social media (such as Twitter and Facebook)
• community facilitators or activists;
1. Why partnership working is useful? Some partners may agree to become part of the neighbourhood forum, where one is proposed, or neighbourhood plan working or steering groups. Some may work closely to support the preparation of the plan. They would be able to provide information and advice, contributing to the evidence base, and may even help in writing parts of the plan. Also, some local groups may have wider memberships or networks, so can help in publicising the plan and in getting local people involved, especially minority and hard-to-engage groups. Thus, they can make life much easier for the parish or town council or neigh
•Early stage:
APPENDIX 4.3.3 -3: COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERANDENGAGEMENT
• local councillors;
• Early stage: The purpose is to gather information, awareness of people’s views and to identify key is sues and themes. These may inform the vision and aims and policies of the plan.
2. Local stakeholders and/or partners could include:
2. The guidance of engagement
• local institutions such as arts centres, performance venues, architecture or built environment centres;
• major employers and business organisations, including chambers of trade or commerce; communi ty groups such as residents’ associations, local civic or amenity societies, local history groups or sports clubs; landowners of key sites or organisations with significant property holdings and developers with site options; local trusts and project groups, such as community development trusts, land trusts or build ing preservation trusts; not-for-profit organisations representing minority groups (e.g. elderly, disabled, young people, low-in come, LGBT+ groups, faith groups and ethnic groups);
• The local planning authority should be able to pro vide support, especially through its own newslet ters, publications or by placing notices in libraries and other public buildings.
•Consulting stage:
• Notices and/or leaflets could be prepared to place in local public buildings and shops.
• Presence at local events (such as markets and festivals)
1. The reasons why community engagement is neces sary and important
• what issues affect the area (now or in the fu •ture)?what change would you like to see?
• It is important to create and maintain a neighbour hood plan website
• educational establishments such as schools, colleg es and universities;
APPENDIX 4.3.3 -1: THE PURPOSE OF PUBLICITY AND ENGAGEMENT
Care should be taken to ask open questions and avoid ‘loading’ the process.
• what are the neighbourhood’s qualities as • a place to live and work in?
3.2 Community engagement
• Post leaflets through letterboxes
• regional or local branches of professional bodies.
• Better outcomes
Few people will have the time or inclination to read a detailed document. Therefore, it may be useful to produce a concise summary version. This can set out the aims, main themes and general direction of policy, but in very concise form. It should also set out where the full version of the plan may be exam-ined (on-line and printed copies) and how people may respond.
Mid-stage•Mid-stage:community engagement should be designed to provide information needed to develop the detail of the neighbourhood plan. For example, discussions could focus on a town centre or local shopping centre, housing needs, or a key public space. For some sites, policies or proposals, different options may be discussed so that people can discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each.
6362
Effective community engagement and a robust evidence base are the foundations on which an effective neigh bourhood plan will be built. It is important to seek to engage the wider community too, to gain from their knowledge and seek their views.
• Mid-stage: Mid-stage community engagement should be designed to provide information needed to develop the detail of the neighbourhood plan.
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3. Publicity and Engagement
3.1 Stakeholders and partners engagement
bourhood forum and contribute significantly to the production of the plan.
• local shopkeepers and small businesses;
• what is bad about the area?
APPENDIX 4.3.3 -2: THE WAY OF PUBLICITY
• what is good about the area?
The draft neighbourhood plan proposal must be submit ted to the local planning authority. The neighbourhood plan submission must include the following:
6. A statement on how the plan fulfils the basic condi tions (see previous sections on the ‘basic conditions’ and later section on the ‘basic conditions’ statement).
3. The neighbourhood plan proposal;
4.3 Process of Neighbourhood Plan
The 6-week Regulation 14 consultation Neighbourhood planning regulations (Regulation 14) require the draft neighbourhood plan proposal to be the subject of a pre-submission consultation before it is submitted to the local authority for independent exam ination. The consultation should last at least 6 weeks. The neighbourhood planning body will need to approve the consultation draft of the plan and that the Regula tion 14 consultation takes place.
•Anyone on the neighbourhood plan database that has previously been involved
APPENDIX 4.3.5 -1: DEFINITION OF PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION
Submission of the plan to the local planning au thority
4. Summary of community engagement: It is useful to provide a brief overview of the community engagement programme that was undertaken and the key outcomes/issues arising.
• Details of how they were consulted;
• Through the consultation process;
• A summary of the main issues and concerns raised
6564
5. A statement on how the plan fulfils the basic condi tions (see previous sections on the ‘basic conditions’ and later section on the ‘basic conditions’ statement).
• A summary of the main issues and concerns raised
“Neighborhood Planning Roadmap - Final Stage”
- Appendix -
APPENDIX 4.3.5 -2: OBJECT OF CONSULTATION
•Be sent to the local planning authority
• The proposed neighbourhood plan;
APPENDIX 4.3.5 -3: CONTENT OF A STATEMENT OF CONSULTATION
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 5. Pre-submission consultation & 6. Submission
2. A consultation statement (see later section on the consultation statement);
•People who live, work or run businesses in the area
• Through the consultation process;
•Stakeholders:Neighbouring local, town or parish councils; Significant landowners; Local nusinesses; Local community organisations (chambers of Com merce, civic societies, local trusts)
• Details of people and organisations consulted about
•Certain statutory bodies: The county council (if applicable); The Environment Agency; Natural England and Historic England
1. A map or statement, which identifies the area to which the plan relates (a map makes more sense than a statement!); a consultation statement (see later section on the consultation statement);
APPENDIX SUBMISSION4.3.6:
The details is from the Regulation 14 consultation
2. Precept (for town/parish councils);
3. Local Donations;
- Appendix -
with a Neighbourhood Plan will receive 25% of any CIL arising from development in their area compared to a community without a Neighbourhood Plan who will receive 15%. There is some discussion on the fairness of this but this is the likeliest outcome.
6766
1. Specific Neighborhood Grants (such as the Locality neighbourhood planning support programme): Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
& CommunityTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 1. Financial Supports
APPENDIX 4.4.1 -2: “THE INFRASTRUCTURECOMMUNITY LEVY”
The Community Infrastructure Levy (the ‘levy’) is a charge which can be levied by local authorities on new development in their area. It is an important tool for local authorities to use to help them deliver the infrastructure needed to support development in their area. The money raised from the CIL can be used to support development by funding infrastructure that the council, local community and neighbourhood want, like new or safer road schemes, park improvements or a new health Acentre.community
The draft neighbourhood plan proposal must be submitted to the local planning authority. The neighbourhood plan submission must include the following:
5.
4.4 Supports for Forums
Submission of the plan to the local planning authority
APPENDIX 4.4.1 -1: THE TYPE FINANCIALOFSUPPORTS
4. Local Businesses/ Chambers of commerce; Developers and Landowners;
@Relationship between the levy and NPs in England
6. Local authorities: Community Asset Transfer (CAT )
What is the Community Infrastructure Levy?[44]
... In practice, the Community Right to Challenge could only be enforced by two types of organisa tion:
- Appendix -
“Relevant bodies - The Act lists the following as rele vant bodies:
4.4 Supports
Step 3: Once the initial negotiations are over, a draft CPO may be served should the landowner decline a sale. Landowners should contact the authority for a better understanding of the process and what is expected. You should also keep track of all events and expenses associated with the CPO. The applicant will then have to compile a CPO report in readiness for both landowner negotiations and an inquiry with the appro priate authority.
Step 4: The landowner must provide additional infor mation, including proof of ownership of the land. Any failure to provide requested information or providing false information is illegal. If you have been served with a draft notice, you should seek legal advice imme
Stepinterest.6:A
CPO’s are common for public projects like road im provement and rail schemes, airport extensions, urban regeneration projects and utility and infrastructure developments. For a CPO to be successful, the acquir ing authority must meet certain criteria, including proof that the purchase is of public interest. CPO’s can be issued by various acquiring authorities, including local government and regional development authorities, utility companies, government agencies and transport companies, e.g. HS2.
Acquiring authority cannot force a private homeowner to sell their land or property. Anybody looking to pur chase private land needs to secure a CPO and can only do this after demonstrating why it is required. This is usually (but not always) through a public inquiry process. Sometimes, as in the case of water companies, powers giving access to land are contained in legisla tion specific to that utility. Additionally, special rules exist for very large schemes such as power stations and transport projects.
a) A voluntary or community body; b) A body of persons or a trust which is established for charitable purposes only; c) A parish council; d) Two or more employees of the relevant authority; or e) Any other person or body specified by the Secretary of State by regulations.”
PURCHASE“COMPULSORYORDER”
“Relevant authorities - The Act lists the following as relevant authorities: a) A county council; b) A district council; c) A London borough council; or d) Any other person or body carrying out a function of a public nature specified by the Secretary of State in reg ulations. (Certain fire and rescue authorities are added as relevant authorities in the Regulations)...
Stepdiately.5:
Step 1: The applicant must undertake a feasibility study of the area and surrounds to determine what ex tent of the land is required. The land being considered should form part of the feasibility study.
Once all the relevant data has been collected, the authority can work towards an inquiry to uphold the draft orders. The draft CPO should include details like plans for the area, the owner’s particulars, and the details of any third parties. Additionally, a press release announcing the proposed CPO must be pub lished in the local newspaper for at least two weeks and a physical notice must be erected on or near the area of
APPENDIX 4.4.2 -5: THE PROCESS OF A CPO
separate notice will also have to be served to everyone who will potentially be affected by the draft CPO. These notices should also detail how and when objections will be considered and suggest a suitable time for a hearing.
APPENDIX 4.4.2 -4:
A compulsory purchase order (CPO) is a legal process that allows acquiring authorities (including public and private bodies) to require those with interest in prop erty, e.g. owners and occupiers, to sell their interests if they obstruct any development or infrastructure project that benefits the ‘greater public good’.[49]
Step 2: The applicant will contact the landowner/occu pier to make arrangements to negotiate.
A CPO can be lengthy and drawn out. Here we lay out the step-by-step compulsory purchase order procedure[50]:
for Forums & CommunityTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. Political Supports
Step 7: After the closing date for any objections has passed, it will be decided if an inquiry is necessary, depending on the legitimacy of the objections. The out come of the inquiry will determine whether the CPO is accepted, rejected, or needs to be modified. Reasons for the decision should also be given.
Step 8: Once the CPO is successfully accepted, the land owner will be eligible for compensation, which will be calculated according to various factors like the value of the property.
6968
1. The land or property described in the request process is underutilized or vacant;
APPENDIX 4.4.2 -7: “COMMUNITY RIGHT TO RECLAIM LAND”
Communityspace.
In England, large tracts of previously developed land are vacant or underutilized. Most are owned by public institutions. Since assets are held on behalf of tax payers, they must be used efficiently. When land is no longer needed, it should be sold, such as for housing or other development, or for use as public or community
How does the Community Right to Reclaim Land work?
Right to Reclaim Land Order make it easi er to put land back into use if the land is owned by local authorities or other public bodies such as the Environ ment Agency, the BBC or the British Transport Police. A full list of these agencies is provided in Schedule 16 of the Local Government, Planning and Land Act 1980.
Under the community’s right to reclaim land, anyone can make a request to the Minister of Communities and Local Government stating why they believe:
- Appendix4.4 Supports for Forums & CommunityTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. Political & Technical Supports
Public Request to Order Disposal Form, @Communities and Local Government 7170
3. The land shall be disposed of by its current owner so that it can be put back into use;
2. No suitable, consulted and publicly tested plans are in place or likely to be in place within an acceptable time period;
Once a request has been submitted under the Commu nity Reclamation Land Rights, it will be assessed by the Secretary of Community and Local Government, which will include learning from the current owners of any plans of use they may have. If, after this stage, the Secretary of State decides that the land is vacant and underutilized, and the council has no plans to bring it into use, they can issue a notice of disposal requiring the public agency to dispose of the land.[54]
Where councils hold unused or under used land, anyone can submit a request to the Secretary of State for Com munities and Local Government requesting that the council is directed to dispose of the land so that it can brought back into use.[53]
The land should provide a setting for, and allow views of, heritage assets or other locally-valued landmarks. It may be necessary to research historic records from the County Archaeologist or National or Local Records Office.
APPENDIX 4.4.2 -10: PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES LOCAL GREEN SPACE DESIGNATION
The land must not be isolated from the community. Some councils have policies relating to LGS and have introduced a maximum distance between the space and the community. For instance, one has stated it must be within 400 metres, another 600 metres. The land has to be ‘demonstrably special to a local community’.
The land has to be ‘reasonably close to the community it serves’. There is no definition of this in the NPPF and it will be up to individual planning authorities to define. This may vary depending on the size of the com munity to which the green space relates, the size of the green space or the value placed on it by the community.
(d) SomeTranquilityauthorities have an existing tranquility map showing areas that provide an oasis of calm and a space for quiet reflection.
This might include the value of its habitat, and priority areas may have been identified by the council. It may require some objective evidence, such as a designation,
7372
- Appendix4.4 Supports for Forums & CommunityTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. Political & Technical Supports
(a) ThisBeautyrelates to the visual attractiveness of the site, and its contribution to landscape, character and or setting of the settlement. The LGS would need to contribute to local identity, character of the area and a sense of place, and make an important contribution to the physical form and layout of the settlement. It may link up with other open spaces and allow views through or beyond the settlement which are valued locally.
The criteria may differ between settlements depending on their physical size and population. The areas would normally be fairly self-contained with clearly-defined edges.
(b) Historic significance
(c) Recreational value
What are the ‘particular circumstances’ that qualify a piece of land for Local Green Space Designation protection?[58]
(e) Richness of wildlife
Evidence must be provided of the land’s value to and use by the local community to show that it holds a particular local significance. The land must fulfil one or more of the following criteria:
It must have local significance for recreation, perhaps through the variety of activities it supports, and be of value to the community.
The land needs to be ‘local in character, not an exten sive tract of land’.
like a wildlife site or Local Nature Reserve.
- Appendix4.4 Supports for Forums & CommunityTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 2. Political & Technical Supports Meanwhile Use, @Arup 7574
• Keep electoral services aware of progress
• Ensure consistency with their consultation e.g. who was consulted?
Local planning authorities provide planning enforcement services which are a vital part of the planning process. By identifying and tackling cases of unauthorised development, the enforcement process ensures fairness, stops unacceptable development and gives communities confidence in the system.[63]
Policy writing can be a big challenge - likely to have multiple iterations
• Similar process as for Local Plan
Useful Resource for Supports, @Locality
Early consultation and evidence:
• Relaxing of locational policy
• Consulting the right people, including you!
• Basic Conditions and PAS checklist
• Ensure the Plan is ready
• Continuity and maintaining progress
7776
• Normally 6 or fewer and a cap of 30 on delivery within plan period
Submission & the LPA’s consultation
• Streamline the reporting process right through to adoption/making the plan
Sets the scope for policy topics the Plan will cover and backs them up – what do they need, what’s available?
LOCAL PLANNING AUTHORITY SUPPORTS
4.4 Supports for Forums & CommunityTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 3. Other Supports
Supporting during drafting and their formal consultation
• Iterative process – community buy-in Grange – good practice Lower Allithwaite
- Appendix -
• Use other Council departments
APPENDIX 4.4.3:
• Refer back to legislation and checklist
• NPIERS – line up an examiner as early as possible
• Implementation
• It is their Plan – keep them updated - but it will also become part of the Development Plan
• Earliest consultation/evidence should inform designation – ensure a record is kept
• Specific evidence for sole or primary residence policy Heversham & Hincaster
• Genuine community buy-in and evidence of it
• Basic conditions
• Their capacity and the quality and quantity of any other support they have – but know your limits!
Submission documents – check – return if necessary
APPENDIX 4.4.4: SUMMARY
7978
- Appendix4.4 Supports for Forums & CommunityTerm 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 4. Summary
“Tools for Community Development”
The diagram on the left summarizes the tools men tioned above, rearranged and divided according to “scope of involvement”, “degree of difficulty”, “degree of intervention” and “degree of protection”. When faced with neighborhood planning problems, people can use it to quickly find tools that may work, and then use our encyclopedia to understand the corresponding tools and methods in more detail.
file/14880/Community_Right_to_Bid_-_Non-statutory_advice_note_ [48]for_local_authorities.pdf“England’sCommunity Right to Challenge”, Centre for Public Impact – A BCG Foundation, last modified Nov 8, 2018, https:// ty-right-challengewww.centreforpublicimpact.org/case-study/englands-communi
[49] “Compulsory purchase order process”, Shelter, last modified Sep 14, 2021, [51]what-is-a-compulsory-purchase-order/Bidwells,[50]sory_purchase_order_processlegal/possession_and_eviction/compulsory_purchase_orders/compulhttps://england.shelter.org.uk/professional_resources/JeremyProcter,“WhatisaCompulsoryPurchaseOrder?”,June10,2018,https://www.bidwells.co.uk/what-we-think/“CommunityAssetTransfer”,LlywodraethCymruWelsh Government, 2019, https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publica tions/2019-10/cat%20guide.pdf
[61]pdf
port_-_final.pdfwww.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/neighbourhood_planning_re
[41] “Section 61G”, Town and Country Planning Act 1990, UK Gov ernment, https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/61G
“Public-Common Partner ships Building New Circuits of Collective Ownership,“ last modified June 27, 2019, [39]eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/140905/Renewal:Towards[38]ershiplic-common-partnerships-building-new-circuits-of-collective-ownhttps://www.common-wealth.co.uk/reports/pubMilburnKeirandRussellBertie,“Whatcananinstitutiondo?Public-Commonpartnershipsandanewcommon-sense,”Ajournalofsocialdemocracy,26(4),(2018):45-55,http://MilburnKeirandRussellBertie,“Public-CommonPartner
Term 2 AA Landcape Urbanism 2021/22 81
[52] “Community Asset Transfer Policy 2020”, City of Bradford Metro politan District Council, Sep, 2020, https://www.bradford.gov.uk/me [53]dia/6226/cat-policy-2020.pdf“2010to2015government policy: localism, Appendix 5: Community Right to Reclaim Land”, Community and Society, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, last modified May 8, 2015, https:// Fortismer[56]res).pdfAgenda/8%20Appendix%202%20-%20Site%20Allocations%20(low%202013,[55]ing-the-community-right-to-reclaim-landCommunity,[54]munity-right-to-reclaim-landcy-localism/2010-to-2015-government-policy-localism#appendix-5-comwww.gov.uk/government/publications/2010-to-2015-government-poli“UnderstandingtheCommunityRighttoReclaimLand”,MyMay14,2020,https://mycommunity.org.uk/understand“Islington’sLocalPlan:SiteAllocations”,IslingtonCouncil,June,https://democracy.islington.gov.uk/Data/Council/201306271930/“NeighbourhoodPlanningSiteAllocationsGuidanceandToolkit”,Associates,Feb,2017, https://www.local.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/A%20toolkit%20 [57]cating%20sites.pdffor%20neighbourhood%20planning%20groups%20that%20are%20allo“LocalGreenSpaces:newresearchprovestheirvaluetopeopleand nature”, The Countryside Charity, last modified Feb 2nd, 2022, https:// ue-to-people-and-nature/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwmPSSBhCNARIsAH3cYgawww.cpre.org.uk/news/local-green-spaces-new-research-proves-their-val KZ1FoPoipLqHcedbtpA6unYDbflqSBO-N_rw1p_iG4gmK43DKfrgaApd
ships Building New Circuits of Collective Ownership,“ last modified June 27, 2019, and[40]ershiplic-common-partnerships-building-new-circuits-of-collective-ownhttps://www.common-wealth.co.uk/reports/pub“RecommendationsinNeighbourhoodPlanning-ProgressInsights”,MayorofLondon,March12,2020,p.24-28,https://
[58]DEALw_wcB“Frequently
[60] Fiona Twycross, “Meanwhile Use London”, Arup, Nov 2020, https:// www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/meanwhile_use_for_london_final.
[34] Tony Bovaird and Elke Loeffler, eds., Public Manage ment and Governance, (Routledge, 2015), chap. 17, https://doi. [35]org/10.4324/9781315693279HuanmingWang,WeiXiong, Guangdong Wu and Dajian Zhu, “Public–private partnership in Public Administration discipline: a literature review,” Public Management Review,20:2, (2018): 293316, https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2017.1313445
[42] Dave Chetwyn, MA, MRTPI, IHBC and FlnstLM, “Neighbor hood Plans Roadmap”, Locality, March 2018, gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/andsetsauthorities”,[47]community-value-acvty,[46]EALw_wcBrEPSpKAmyNyUApryz0vMWJSG_XB7DD6gCqLm5gDrMaArrxership?gclid=Cj0KCQjw6pOTBhCTARIsAHF23fLoVBf6ziIH3L2020,[45]ture-levyAprilof[44]hood-planning-forum/?type%5B%5D=getting-started#primarybourhoodplanning.org/toolkits-and-guidance/establish-neighbour[43]hoodplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/NP_Roadmap_online_full.pdfhttps://neighbour“Establishinganeighborhoodforum”,Locality,https://neigh“CommunityInfrastructureLevy”,Planningsystem,MinistryHousing,CommunitiesandLocalGovernment,lastupdated52022,https://www.gov.uk/guidance/community-infrastruc“Communityassetsandownership“,MyCommunity,May,https://mycommunity.org.uk/community-assets-and-own“WhatareAssetsofCommunityValue(ACV)?”,MyCommuniMay12,2020,https://mycommunity.org.uk/what-are-assets-of-“CommunityRighttoBid:Non-statutoryadvicenoteforlocalPart5Chapter3oftheLocalismAct2011andtheAsofCommunityRegulations2012,DepartmentforCommunitiesLocalGovernment,Oct2012,https://assets.publishing.service.
“Community Right to Build Orders,” Neighborhood Planning, Surrey Heath Borough Council, and[63]ing-community-right-to-build-ordersCommunity,[62]ty-right-build-ordersresidents/planning/planning-policy/neighbourhood-planning/communihttps://www.surreyheath.gov.uk/Locality,“UnderstandingCommunityRighttoBuildOrders,”MyMay13,2020,https://mycommunity.org.uk/understandLorayneWoodendWall,“LPAsupportforNeighbourhoodPlanningtheexperienceofPlanningAidassistance”,RoyalTownPlanning Institute, https://nwnpn.files.wordpress.com/2019/07/lorayne-wood end-pae.pdf
[36] Milburn Keir and Russell Bertie, “What can an institution do? Towards Public-Common partnerships and a new common-sense,” Renewal: A journal of social democracy, 26 (4), (2018): 45-55, http:// [37]eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/140905/MilburnKeirandRussellBertie,
Asked Questions about Local Green Space Designation,” Open Spaces Society, publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachCommunities[59]husYs4kZ42NxdYDp4aAhCyEALw_wcBhCNARIsAH3cYgb-CtCxM0WoAQxDVOUelSGEiFWpJHoRJZW82ffaqs-about-local-green-space-designation/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwmPSSBhttps://www.oss.org.uk/“Meanwhileuseleaseandguidancenotes”,MinistryofHousing,andLocalGovernment,Nov14,2012,https://assets. ment_data/file/230037/Meanwhile_use_lease_and_guidance.pdf
URBANISMLANDSCAPEAALU
